RE:RE:Adoption of New TechnologyGood points Clem....
In terms of practical efficiency/motivation, as I have mentioned in previous posts, I have an order in for an IONIQ5. Yes the initial cost is higher than a comparable ICE but the lower cost of fuel and maintence based on my math suggests a payback of this differential in about 2 years and then after that the savings are gravy. It is highly likely that the cost differential is going to disappear probably over the next 2-3 years and so the gravy will start on day one.
The other thing from a purely investment point of view that I keep hammering away at is that wise and disciplined investors look at the whole universe of where to put their investment dollars. Investing in an industry where there is are known headwinds compared to an industry where there is a tailwind doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Now that statement doesn't mean to invest in EV makers such as TSLA. In fact I have argued (and made investments) in companies both public and private that have technologies to solve the problems, one of which you identified.
To me the only rationale for staying heavily invested in oil companies is if you subscribe to the belief of Migraine that supply destruction will be much greater than demand destruction and the price of oil will go up a lot. Personally, I don't believe that for a minute and this belief extends far beyond EVs. As I type this, I am wearing blue jeans made of recyled plastics and the amount oil needed to make them compared to my other blue jeans is 75% less. As another example, solar energy technologies exist today where building products such as siding can generate electricity to heat homes. Ironically, SU's push for carbon capture will produce the raw materials to reduce energy/oil requirement for asphalt on roads and cement and building products which require a lot of energy to produce.
So when I put things like together, my conclusion is that oil companies in the future will be like a salmon trying to swim up the Fraser River to the spawning grounds - it will be a struggle and I would rather be invsted in companies that have a growing market for what they produce as opposed to a shrinking market.
My overal sense and also from my decades of experience in the investment world is that the big money already realizes this. From a simple look at finanical metrics, SU (and the others such as CNQ and MEG) they are selling at a discount to their for example their FCF per share and so this begs the question "Why is that?". To me the answer lies in what I have saying here and in other posts.